1993-03-25 - Re: Many Important Items in the News

Header Data

From: david@staff.udc.upenn.edu (R. David Murray)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 076a4f5504c457c6fa1e75cb6ba2c9e09bc6c11c9441338444b1ddc22ea99a9e
Message ID: <9303252255.AA08705@staff.udc.upenn.edu>
Reply To: <9303252149.AA17207@servo>
UTC Datetime: 1993-03-25 22:58:57 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 14:58:57 PST

Raw message

From: david@staff.udc.upenn.edu (R. David Murray)
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 14:58:57 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re:  Many Important Items in the News
In-Reply-To: <9303252149.AA17207@servo>
Message-ID: <9303252255.AA08705@staff.udc.upenn.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

Phil Karn writes:
> I think an enlightened approach that eschews a single, network-wide
> policy on the acceptability of anonymous messages in favor of leaving
> it up to the individual email recipient is something that we could
> sell to the Internet as a whole.

You know, what we might to do is figure out a first cut position, and
then set up a mock debate.  Have some members 'role-play' vociforous
opponents of nyms.  That way we might be able to work out in
advance good counter arguments for the nastiest objections any of us can
think of.  I'm sure the /real/ ojectors will come up with stuff we
don't, but at least it would give us a leg up.  I think I'd recommend
setting this up as a formal 'game', with all participants adopting nyms
to keep the argumentation distinct from normal discourse.  Even if it
was done on a separate mailing list.  See, another good use for nyms

david			david@staff.udc.upenn.edu